Much of our attention is devoted to the changes wrought by new media technologies. And we seem as equally preoccupied about the myth of these technologies as the gadgets themselves. It's not enough to make a call using an iPhone, or to post a video on YouTube, instead we are immersed in a discourse of change, for good or ill. (For example, the accessibility of one's cell phone can be thought of as liberating or enslaving.) In this seminar we are going to look at a number of new media issues, such as identity and privacy. Through this we will also touch upon concepts about technological emergence such as "path dependence" and "preferential attachment." But we are also going to go "meta." I want us to appreciate the metaphorical, narrative, and mythic ways in which we speak of and understand technology. This will help us appreciate some of the common themes of technology, such as its rise and fall, its effects, or its autonomy. This should also further a reasoned skepticism about some of the "hype" we encounter.

Throughout the course, we will be considering how others have thought of technology, particularly predictions about their implications for society's and our own future contentment. Above and beyond understanding the "pros" or "cons" of technological change, I hope we will be able to identify common pitfalls in thinking about technology and gain the ability to reach for a more sophisticated understanding of technological implications. Consequently, this course aims to provide you with tools to critically evaluate the way technology is thought of:

to identify common tropes of technology (e.g., technology as savior) and underlying concepts (e.g., determinism)

to uncover hidden assumptions about technology's operation,

to appreciate the fallible nature of understanding technology and its future implications.

"... Academic integrity is the guiding principle for all that you do, from taking exams, making oral presentations to writing term papers. It requires that you recognize and acknowledge information derived from others, and take credit only for ideas and work that are yours."

Attendance: Your participation and attendance are expected; this entails coming to class on time, with the readings or any other assignments completed.

Reading: Thorough coverage of the week’s required reading in advance of class is of utmost importance. If it become clear that students have not done the required reading, they may be asked to leave that class. Because I prefer to focus class time on discussing what is novel or confusing to the class, I do not spend a lot of time summarizing the reading. You will have already read and summarized the reading and should be prepared to offer insights, questions, critiques, and examples. Also, I do not assign an excessive amount of reading so if you're unfamiliar with basic background information, use a reference work -- Wikipedia is often handy! And feel free to ask for clarification in class. All questions are welcome and a really good question is one of the best contributions you can make.

Reading response

The per-class response (~200 words) is a mandatory assignment. You are required to post your response before 7 AM of the day of the class. The critical response format is an excellent tool for active reading: to make sense of the texts and to add your own critical insights to what you’ve read. These responses also contribute to a much richer and more interesting class discussion. You should see this as an opportunity to practice your writing skills, so do not treat your response as you would an e-mail to your friends.

In order to receive credit for a response, it must be complete, thoughtful, and on time. You may draw upon your own experience, but only if it highlights a thorough understanding of the text.

Four "freebies" are given on the responses: those lowest grades, including absences, will be dropped from the grade. Use these wisely. Even if you don't prepare a written response, you will still be expected to participate in class. Also, even if you know you will be absent from class, you may still send your response.

In-class presentation: Each student will give a presentation during the semester based on one of their written assignments.

Papers: A midterm paper (5 pages) and a final paper (10 pages) are required. All papers should demonstrate a close reading of the required texts and exhibit a method of critical analysis.

Absence and late policy: In order to accommodate the inevitable cold or subway jam three "freebies" are given in attendance. Other absences or late assignments will affect the final grade.

Grading

Formula

10pts Class participation

15pts Reading response

30pts Midterm Paper

10pts In-class presentation

35pts Final paper

Rubric

In this class' grading scheme, a "B," for example, is not a subtraction from an initial state of an "A," but rather recognition of good and thorough work.

A = Excellent. Writing demonstrates impressive understanding of readings, discussions, themes and ideas. Written work is fluid, clear, analytical, well-organized and grammatically polished. Reasoning and logic are well-grounded and examples precise.

B = Good. Work demonstrates a thorough and solid understanding of readings, discussions, themes and ideas. Written work is clear and competent, but is somewhat general, a bit vague, or otherwise lacking in precision. While analytical, writing presents more description than analysis. Arguments are solid but not thoroughly original or polished.

C = Fair. Work demonstrates a somewhat fragmented understanding of readings, discussions, themes and ideas. Shows acquaintance with readings and ideas, but not intellectual engagement. Written work is choppy and argument somewhat difficult to follow, examples are vague or irrelevant, and ideas are imprecise. Work veers toward underdeveloped ideas, off-topic sources or examples, personal anecdotes, creative writing, memoir, etc.

D = Unsatisfactory. Work demonstrates little understanding or even acquaintance with readings, discussions, themes and ideas. Written work is choppy, fractured and unclear. Argument follows little logical development, or work presents little discernable argument whatsoever.

F = Failure / Unacceptable. Work does not demonstrate understanding of topics, ideas and readings. This is also the grade for work not submitted and plagiarized work.

Students will often ask if I grade on a curve. If everyone did excellent -- something I would like to see and help make happen -- that would correspondingly be reflected. However, assessed grades typically follow a "curved" distribution: typically some work is excellent, a minority is unsatisfactory, and most is quite good.

Assignments

Preliminary descriptions of assignments are provided but may change prior to formal assignment.

Mid-term paper

Review some of the quotations on the Wikipedia's Failed Predictions article about technology. Write a ~5 page (~1300 word) essay applying the readings we learned about technological predictions to one or more of those quotations. Realize, that many of these quotations are not sourced and some of the most famous are urban myths. (Determining the provenance of a quotation is encouraged; even if there is no source that you can find, it is best to say so.)

In your essay, you might consider the following questions. Can you discern a pattern in the failed predictions, or factors that may have led to their failure? In what ways do these predictions, even if mythical, act as a story for understanding technology? That is, what do these say about our understanding of technology at the time at which they are reputed to have been said, or about our seemingly present fondness for them? Do the failed predictions exhibit any of the key themes or concepts we identified in class so far? If so, is there a relationship between those concepts/themes and their failure or mythical character?

Write a ~10 page paper (~2500 words) demonstrating an ability to analyze one or more of the technologies we read about from the perspective of this course. The analytical tools available to you in this project include finding and challenging assumptions, identifying common themes and narratives, applying key concepts, and explaining shortcomings in understanding technology. You might pursue this project in at least two ways. You might wish to focus on a case or two (e.g., race and gender online) and perform a broad analysis. Or, you might apply a few analytical themes (e.g., conceptions of movement/change in technology) across many cases.

For example, an outline of the first approach might look like:

Introduce the cases (e.g., identity and relationships) and describe the ways in which the technology was discussed in the readings.

Concisely explain the concepts/themes

Perform your own analysis, for example:

What concepts are invoked in these arguments about technology and its relation to the social?

What common assumptions are there about the phenomenon, or in the argument of the authors?

What metaphors are employed and to what ends?

Can you add any of your own arguments?

Can a position beyond simple pros & cons be found?

Would you be willing to make a prediction: on what grounds and with what caveats?

Since this is a relatively open-ended assignment -- I want you to demonstrate the objectives of the course but also engage an issue you are interested in -- I encourage you to send a short (~200 word) proposal/outline to me by Nov 19 so I can provide feedback if appropriate. Try to identify your topic/question, your likely argument, and the concepts and readings you will likely employ.

Before we begin our own consideration of media -- and related information/communication technologies -- what do historians say about earlier attempts to understand the consequences of technology? For example, why did our predecessors underestimate the capabilities of computers and what led them astray?

"If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done." - Peter Ustinov

"It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of today and the reality of tomorrow." - Robert Goddard (1882-1945)

Some claim virtual communities allows us to relate with others in new ways, many of whom we would have otherwise never met. Others are concerned about the ways in which virtuality might be weakening our "real world" interactions. What evidence is there for these arguments and might the real effect of virtual communities be a patchwork of virtual/real strengthening/weakening social fabric? Perhaps the whole phenomenon of virtual community is over-hyped!

"On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog." Nor do they necessarily know your race, gender, or other "meat space" characteristics. How does a change in technological context affect the way that we perform identity and relates one another?

Is technology yielding more privacy, or less? But perhaps this question presumes that more privacy is always a better thing. How can we best balance privacy and accountability, and settle upon the technology that implements that balance?